Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
You Misunderstand My Perspective!

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Richard D. Stafford, Ph.D. on April 2, 2002 16:47:35 UTC


The constraint I place on myself is very simple: if my perspective is to remain entirely general (i.e., unconstrained) I can posit nothing which limits what which can be seen from that perspective. You clearly do not understand that constraint.

***** Alan:
"The analogy collapses because it has to presume "the rest of the world" in order to deny contact with it."

That statement is incorrect for two reasons: First, as I have defined "reality", "something B" is clearly not part of reality; it is rather a figment of my imagination. As such, it can be absolutely any collection of concepts conceivable. Secondly, to assume that "something B" vanishes, is to assume "reality" has no explanation; a rather pointless assumption if your intent is to explain reality!

***** Alan:
But I'm not sure your conclusion matches John Hospers; the result of all this is that you ARE in direct contact with reality- which is my point.

As I define reality, I certainly am in direct contact; however, the explanation of reality is a figment of my imagination. It is the second which is the subject of any discussion between human beings, not the first!

***** Alan:
You seem to conclude that "the world outside the exchange", "something B", can never be known. The correct conclusion is the opposite of that: it is that there is no such world; no exchange; no isolation from reality. You are in DIRECT contact with reality; you can answer questions about reality.

No Alan, you cannot answer any questions about reality without some interpretation of "something A": i.e., some ideas and/or concepts. Without such, you are utterly in the dark.

***** Alan:
How about addressing some issues in my "rest of reply to Dr. Dick" post?

I thought we just agreed to disagree! Let us just say I do not understand much of what you say.

Have fun -- Dick

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2022 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins